Terry Cloth Lovin'

First off, I actually enjoyed this article, and not necessarily for the subject matter, though the information was both interesting and well collected, but moreso because of the actual writing style. It's refreshing to find a piece that can present information in a story like manner rather rthan just a listing of pointeless facts and recolections of irrelevant experiments. You found sypathy in Harry Harlow, an actual human being rather than just a faceless scientist who did some random tests. This piece displayed the dark complexity of someone dedicated to a career that takes all of them, all the time. The family is examined, children are named, and lives are shown in the way the actually happened. I loved reading this because for once, I wasn't completely bored. However, this woman had some problems with verb tenses, which bothered me throughout the piece. Pick either the past or present and stick to it. But this blog should focus on the information, the actual point of me reading this. His ideas were solid. An awkward man such as he was able to fall into experiments based off of sheer observation and built them into hypothesis and comparitive study. It seemed obvious that the babies would gravitate to something soft and cuddly, but the extent to which these animals dismissed nurishment for love was astonishing. It completely went against the theory that a child intrinsocally loves a moteher for her milk and nothing more at the beginning of life. For humans are, in fact, 94% rhesus macaque monkeys, technically speking. The scenes of babies being torn from their mothers is sad, and the author does a good job of playing up the reader's sympathies, but in reality, none of the data could have been collected had these babies not been torn away. At this point in the aritcle, the author presented the different modes of parenting that were presented at this time, and they literally made me say, wtf( what the fudge=]). Hand shaking and bowing to four year olds? Absolutely not. The part about children thinking the first face is alwast the lovliest was qwuite touching. It then went on the explain the dark Harlow, who introduced "evil mothers" who blew cold air and intimidated the babies. Again, sad, but necessary. When it was found that these babies ahd severe insecure attachment to their mothers, I was almost let down. I wanted so badly for this to work=[. And I agree with the comment made about simply renaming the "rape rack". This term is awfully harsh, and I understand that it's literally what this device was, but it's messed up. I'm not sure how I feel about the actual act, and the results were not extremely suprising, but they were dishearteneing. But how were these babies expected to show love if they had no clue what real mammal on mammal love was? Near the end of the article, the author went on the express her intense sadness and pity for these animals. I'm not a big animal rights person. I knid of hate PETA. So she just annoyed me at the end. Good article. Interesting information. Do I like Harry Harlow? No. I think he's an emotionally void jerk. And his work certainly crossed the line sometimes. But, sometimes experiments don't turned out as planned. And you have to do them to know that.